1.
Kate Farrow, acting on behalf of Carly Potts’ father Ian Farrow, complained to
the Independent Press Standards Organisation that the Lancashire Evening Post
breached Clause 3 (Privacy) and Clause 5 (Intrusion into grief or shock) of the
Editors’ Code of Practice in an article headlined “Student committed suicide in
hotel room”, published on 14 October 2015.

2.
The article reported on the inquest of Carly Potts, the complainant’s
stepdaughter. It said that the inquest had heard that Ms Potts had hanged
herself in a hotel room “mirroring the death of her mother seven years
earlier”. It said that in the hours preceding her death, Ms Potts had been
three times over the drink-drive limit, and had taken three drugs, which it
named. The article quoted from the coroner’s summing up, in which he had said
that Ms Potts had “made the decision to bring about her death quickly”. The
newspaper also reported that Ms Potts had worked as a dancer in order to fund
her university studies and to pay off debts.

3.
The online version of the article included additional information on the method
of suicide. It identified the item from which Ms Potts had been found hanged,
and two of the captions identified the item used as a ligature. The online
piece was illustrated by a number of photographs of Ms Potts, and included a
quotation attributed to her grandmother, who had described her granddaughter as
a ”very caring, hard-working and big-hearted girl”.

4.
The complainant said that the content of the online article and the
accompanying images had caused considerable distress to Ms Potts’ family at a
time of grief. She said that the article had included explicit details of her
stepdaughter’s death, about which some members of the family had been unaware,
and had focused inappropriately on her work in a gentleman’s club. She said her
stepdaughter had not “fallen into debt”, as reported; rather, she had
“struggled to make ends meet”. She had also not lived with her grandparents.

5.
The complainant said that despite the coroner making clear that Ms Potts’
father and grandmother did not wish to comment on the matter, her grandmother
had been pressured to comment by reporters outside court. She considered that
comments made in those circumstances should not have been published.

6.
She said the newspaper had also published personal photographs of Ms Potts
taken from her Facebook page without permission. She said the images were
“disproportionate” and inappropriate in number and nature. She said the images,
combined with the article’s focus on Ms Pott’s work as a lap dancer, had
created an insensitive “lads’ mag tone”. She expressed particular concern that
an image of Ms Potts wearing a bikini on a motorbike had been published.

7.
The newspaper said that the story and photographs, which had been taken from an
open Facebook page, had been supplied by a press agency and were published in
good faith. It said that it had a duty to report on the inquest to ensure that
the public understood the circumstances surrounding an untimely death.

8.
The newspaper said it had raised the complainant’s concerns regarding the
conduct of reporters outside court with the agency that supplied the copy. It
said it was sorry that the actions of others had added to the family’s
distress. Had it been aware of these circumstances, it would not have published
the comments made by Ms Potts’ grandmother, and it removed them from the online
article.

9.
Although the newspaper did not consider that the article’s tone had been
insensitive, it said that the publication of the image of Ms Potts on a
motorbike had been “inappropriate”. It removed it, and offered to remove any
others if requested.

10.
While it had great sympathy for members of the family who had been unaware of
the method of Ms Potts’ suicide, this information had been central to the
inquest; it would not have been possible to provide a fair and accurate report
of the proceedings without it. It did not consider that the print or online
version of the piece had included “excessive detail” regarding the method of
suicide. It explained that it had not identified the item used as a ligature in
the print article, or in the main copy of the online version, because this
would have fallen “outside guidelines” for reporting suicide. This detail had
appeared in two captions online as it had been automatically copied from
information attached to the images by the agency; it had since been removed.

11.
The newspaper did not consider that identifying the item from which Ms Potts
had been found hanged constituted excessive detail in the online article. It
said that it had not included information, such as how the ligature had been
applied or secured, that would enable anyone to imitate the method.
Nevertheless, it offered to remove this detail. The newspaper also considered
that it was necessary for it to report Ms Potts’ use of alcohol and drugs in
the hours preceding her death as it was material evidence of her state of mind
at that time; this was also a point considered by the coroner when he recorded
his verdict. In addition, the statement that she had been found in a “locked
room” and had known how “swift death would be” had formed part of a direct
quotation from the coroner’s summing up, and were important factors in how he
had reached his verdict. Nonetheless, it offered to remove these details.

12.
The newspaper did not accept the complainant’s contention that the article had
focused on Ms Potts’ employment. Out of respect for the family, it had chosen
to only refer to her as “a dancer”; it had not, in fact, referred to her as a
“lap dancer” or referred to the nature of her place of work being a gentleman’s
club. However, it considered that her work had been central to the court’s
understanding of her final hours and had therefore been relevant to the story.
The court had heard that Ms Potts had been working at a club on the night of
her death, and had texted colleagues in the hours preceding her death. The
court had also been asked to consider the impact that Ms Potts’ financial
situation might have had on her decision to take her own life.

13.
The newspaper noted that the complainant had also contacted other newspapers to
raise concerns about their coverage of the inquest, and had resolved those
complaints on the basis of apologies and charitable donations. It said it was
not willing to make a charitable donation, but it offered to write a private
letter of apology to Ms Potts’ family, and said it would consider any other
steps the complainant might suggest to resolve the matter.

Relevant
Code Provisions

14.
Clause 3 (Privacy)

i)
Everyone is entitled to respect for his or her private and family life, home,
health and correspondence, including digital communications.

ii)
Editors will be expected to justify intrusions into any individual's private
life without consent. Account will be taken of the complainant's own public
disclosures of information.

iii)
It is unacceptable to photograph individuals in private places without their
consent. Note - Private places are public or private property where there is a
reasonable expectation of privacy.

Clause
5 (Intrusion into grief or shock)

i)
In cases involving personal grief or shock, enquiries and approaches must be
made with sympathy and discretion and publication handled sensitively. This
should not restrict the right to report legal proceedings, such as inquests.

ii)
When reporting suicide, care should be taken to avoid excessive detail about the
method used.

Findings
of the Committee

15.
The purpose of Clause 5 (ii) is to prevent the publication of material that
might lead others to imitate a method of suicide. The online article had
included a number of details relating to the method of suicide, which were not
included in the print article. In particular, the publication of details
concerning the items Ms Potts had used illustrated that they were easily
accessible and could have led to simulative acts. These details were clearly
excessive, and their publication was irresponsible. This represented a breach
of Clause 5 (ii) in the online article.

16.
The Committee acknowledged that some of the information about the method of
suicide had been accidentally published because the photographer’s caption had
been automatically included with the image file. The Committee noted that this
issue had arisen previously in relation to other publications, and it took the
opportunity to draw to editors’ attention the potential dangers of these
errors, and the importance of checking all elements of online material before –
and after – it is published.

17.
Both the print and online versions of the article had stated that Ms Potts had
consumed alcohol and had taken three specific drugs in the hours preceding her
death. However, there was no suggestion in the article that the substances had
been consumed as part of the method of suicide. As such, the inclusion of these
details did not represent a breach of Clause 5. Similarly, the references to
the speed of death did not amount to excessive detail in breach of Clause 5.
The complaint under Clause 5 (ii) was not upheld in relation to the print
article.

18.
Newspapers are entitled to report on inquests, which are public hearings. They
play an important role in informing readers about the evidence presented during
the proceedings, and the coroner’s conclusions regarding the facts surrounding
a person’s death. However, inquests can be very upsetting for the families of
the deceased. The proceedings necessarily involve revisiting the events leading
up to a person’s death in detail, and may reveal information of which family members
had previously been unaware, or which family members would otherwise consider
to be extremely private. In this setting, it is particularly important that
journalists make their enquiries with sensitivity and discretion, as required
by Clause 5 (i) of the Code.

19.
Reporters in attendance at the inquest into Ms Potts’ death had been informed
by the coroner that members of the Potts family did not wish to comment on the
case to newspapers. The newspaper’s agents were made aware through these means
that the family would not welcome an approach for comment about Ms Potts, and
were obliged to take this into account in deciding how to proceed with the
sensitivity required by the Code. In the absence of any specific justification
for persisting with inquiries despite the family’s desire not to be approached,
the reporters’ approach to Ms Potts’ grandmother in these circumstances represented a failure to make enquiries with
sensitivity and discretion, and an intrusion into the family’s grief in breach
of Clause 5 (i).

20.
The newspaper had been entitled to report details of Ms Potts’ employment,
which had been heard at the inquest and were directly relevant to the events
leading up to her death. The newspaper had not presented her work in a
gratuitous or disrespectful manner. In addition, the images that were included
in the online article had been taken from Ms Potts’ open Facebook profile; they
were not explicit or embarrassing, but simply showed her posing for photographs
at home and on holiday. The presentation of the images had not sought to mock
or ridicule Ms Potts; and their publication, along with the factual information
concerning her employment, did not constitute insensitive handling of the story
in breach of Clause 5. Furthermore, in the context of a report on the inquest
into Ms Potts’ death, the publication of images of Ms Potts did not engage the
terms of Clause 3.

Conclusions

21.
The complaint was upheld under Clause 5.

Remedial
Action Required

22.
Having upheld the complaint, the Committee considered what remedial action
should be required.

23.
The newspaper’s agents had failed to make enquiries with sensitivity at a time
of grief in breach of Clause 5 (i); and, in the online article, the newspaper
had published excessive detail regarding the method of suicide in breach of
Clause 5 (ii).

24.
In order to remedy the breaches of the Code, the newspaper should publish the
following adjudication on its website, with a link to the full adjudication
appearing on the homepage for 24 hours; it should then be archived online in
the usual way. The headline must be agreed with IPSO in advance. It should make
clear that the complaint has been upheld by IPSO and make reference to the
subject matter.

25.
The same adjudication should also be published in print, omitting paragraphs 3,
6 and 8, which relate to the breach of Code in the online article. It should
appear on page 5, where the original article appeared, or further forward.

1)
Kate Farrow, acting on behalf of Carly Potts’ father Ian Farrow, complained to
the Independent Press Standards Organisation that the Lancashire Evening Post
breached Clause 5 (Intrusion into grief or shock) of the Editors’ Code of
Practice in an article headlined “Student committed suicide in hotel room”,
published on 14 October 2015.

2)
The article reported on the inquest of Carly Potts, the complainant’s
stepdaughter. It said that the inquest had heard that Ms Potts had hanged
herself.

3)
The complainant said that the online version of the article had caused
considerable distress to Ms Potts’ family at a time of grief. It had included
explicit details of her stepdaughter’s death, about which some family members
had been unaware.

4)
The complainant said that despite the coroner making clear that Ms Potts’
father and grandmother did not wish to comment on the matter, her grandmother
had been pressured to comment by reporters outside the coroner’s court.

5)
The newspaper said that the story had been supplied by a press agency and was
published in good faith. It had raised the complainant’s concerns regarding the
conduct of reporters outside court with the agency. Had it been aware of the
circumstances, it would not have published the comments.

6)
It said it would not have been possible to provide an accurate report of the
inquest without referring to the method of suicide. It did not consider that
the article had included “excessive detail” that would enable the method to be
imitated. It explained that details of one of the items used by Ms Potts had
been included in the captions as it had been copied through from information
attached to the pictures by the agency.

7)
The Committee was very concerned that despite the family’s clear position, Ms
Potts’ grandmother had felt pressured to comment by reporters outside the
coroner’s court. The newspaper’s agents had not made enquiries with sensitivity
and discretion at a time of grief. This represented an intrusion into the
family’s grief in breach of Clause 5 (i).

8)
The purpose of Clause 5 (ii) is to prevent the publication of material that
might lead others to imitate a method of suicide. In this instance, the
identification of the items Ms Potts had used to take her life had been excessive,
and could have led to simulative acts. The publication of these details was
irresponsible, and represented a breach of Clause 5 (ii).

9)
The complaint was upheld, and the Committee required the publication of this
adjudication.

This website uses cookies that provide necessary site functionality and improve your online experience. By continuing to use this website, you agree to the use of cookies. Our cookies notice provides more information about what cookies we use and how you can change them.